Psy Personality 5 1 Analysis of a Personality All Original Content Please. Write a 7 page paper in Word format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources. At least one peer-reviewed reference and at least one other reliable references. Due by Thursday, September 5, 2013. For this assignment, you will have a chance to put into practice all you have been learning throughout this course. You will analyze the personality development of Carl Rogers. Use your textbook, the Internet, and online library resources to research the life history of the theorist, Carl Rogers. Do the following: a. Describe the major life events of the theorist that you feel influenced his or her (Carl Rogers) personality development. b. Describe the cultural influences that had an influence on the chosen theorist’s (Carl Rogers) personality development. c. Analyze Carl Rogers from Freud’s psychoanalytic perspective. d. Analyze Carl Rogers from two other theoretical perspectives studied in this course and choose the two from these mentioned theorists: Alfred Adler, Carl Jung, Karen Horney, Erik Erickson, Alberta Bandura, Abraham Maslow, Rollo May, Julian Rotter, or Walter Mischel – DO NOT USE the trait perspective. e. Summarize and present your critical opinion about how well (or not) these theories explain Carl Rogers. All Original Content Please. Write a 7 page paper in Word format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources. At least one peer-reviewed reference and at least one other reliable reference. Due by Thursday, September 5, 2013. Assignment Grading Criteria for this assignment: Maximum Points Description of influential life events that shaped the theorist’s personality development. (Course Objective [CO2]) 44 Description of cultural influences on the theorist’s development (CO3) 44 Analysis of theorist using Freud’s psychoanalytic perspective (CO2) 48 Analysis of theorist from two other theoretical perspectives (CO2) 48 Evaluates how well these theories explain the person (CO 2) 52 Presentation Components: Organization (16) Usage and Mechanics (16) APA Elements (24) Style (8) 64 Total: 300 Below is the rubric that this paper will be graded against: Unsatisfactory Emerging Proficient Exemplary Description of influential life events that shaped the theorist’s personality development. CO2 Description is unclear. Explanation of how these events shaped the theorist’s personality development is limited: too little support provided, leaving the explanation incomplete or inaccurate. Description is somewhat clear. Explanation of how these events shaped the theorist’s personality development is present, but must be inferred: support from the theorist’s life and course material is present, but either inaccurate or not clearly or thoroughly explained. Description is clear and thorough. Direct explanation of how these events shaped the theorist’s personality development is accurate, grounded in reason, and uses details/specifics of the life and course materi ...

1. Psy Personality 5 1 Analysis of a Personality
All Original Content Please. Write a 7 page paper in Word
format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources. At least
one peer-reviewed reference and at least one other reliable
references. Due by Thursday, September 5, 2013.
For this assignment, you will have a chance to put into practice
all you have been learning throughout this course. You will
analyze the personality development of Carl Rogers.
Use your textbook, the Internet, and online library resources to
research the life history of the theorist, Carl Rogers.
Do the following:
a. Describe the major life events of the theorist that you feel
influenced his or her (Carl Rogers) personality development.
b. Describe the cultural influences that had an influence on the
chosen theorist’s (Carl Rogers) personality development.
c. Analyze Carl Rogers from Freud’s psychoanalytic
perspective.
d. Analyze Carl Rogers from two other theoretical perspectives
studied in this course and choose the two from these mentioned
theorists: Alfred Adler, Carl Jung, Karen Horney, Erik
Erickson, Alberta Bandura, Abraham Maslow, Rollo May, Julian
Rotter, or Walter Mischel – DO NOT USE the trait perspective.
e. Summarize and present your critical opinion about how well
(or not) these theories explain Carl Rogers.
All Original Content Please. Write a 7 page paper in Word
format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources. At least
one peer-reviewed reference and at least one other reliable
reference. Due by Thursday, September 5, 2013.
Assignment Grading Criteria for this assignment:
Maximum Points
Description of influential life events that shaped the theorist’s
personality development.
(Course Objective [CO2])

2. 44
Description of cultural influences on the theorist’s development
(CO3)
44
Analysis of theorist using Freud’s psychoanalytic perspective
(CO2)
48
Analysis of theorist from two other theoretical perspectives
(CO2)
48
Evaluates how well these theories explain the person
(CO 2)
52
Presentation Components:
Organization (16)
Usage and Mechanics (16)
APA Elements (24)
Style (8)
64
Total:
300
Below is the rubric that this paper will be graded against:
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Proficient
Exemplary
Description of influential life events that shaped the theorist’s
personality development.
CO2
Description is unclear. Explanation of how these events shaped

3. the theorist’s personality development is limited: too little
support provided, leaving the explanation incomplete or
inaccurate.
Description is somewhat clear. Explanation of how these events
shaped the theorist’s personality development is present, but
must be inferred: support from the theorist’s life and course
material is present, but either inaccurate or not clearly or
thoroughly explained.
Description is clear and thorough. Direct explanation of how
these events shaped the theorist’s personality development is
accurate, grounded in reason, and uses details/specifics of the
life and course material to draw support.
Description is clear, concise, and thorough. Direct explanation
of how these events shapes the theorist’s personality
development is insightful, accurate, grounded in reason, and
synthesizes details/specifics of the life and course material to
provide support and proof.
Description of cultural influences on the theorist’s
development.
CO3
Description is unclear. Explanation of how these influences
shaped the theorist’s personality development is limited: too
little support provided, leaving the explanation incomplete or
inaccurate.
Description is somewhat clear. Explanation of how these
influences shaped the theorist’s personality development is
present, but must be inferred: support from the theorist’s life
and course material is present, but either inaccurate or not
clearly or thoroughly explained.
Description is clear and thorough. Direct explanation of how
these influences shaped the personality development is accurate,
grounded in reason, and uses details/specifics of the life and
course material to draw support.

4. Description is clear, concise, and thorough. Direct explanation
of how these influences shaped the personality development is
insightful, accurate, grounded in reason, and synthesizes
details/specifics of the life and course material to provide
support and proof.
Analysis of theorist using Freud’s psychoanalytic perspective.
CO2
Analysis inaccurately applies Freud’s psychoanalytic
perspective. Results are both inaccurate and not grounded in
reason. Support from life or course material is missing.
Analysis somewhat accurately applies Freud’s psychoanalytic
perspective. Results are either inaccurate or not grounded in
reason. Details and specifics from life and course material are
attempted to be used as support, but their significance may have
to be inferred.
Analysis accurately applies Freud’s psychoanalytic perspective.
Results are accurate and grounded in reason. Details and
specifics from life and course material are used for support.
Analysis insightfully and accurately applies Freud’s
psychoanalytic perspective. Results are astute, accurate, and
firmly grounded in reason. Details and specifics from life and
course material are synthesized and provided as support and
proof.
Analysis of theorist from two other theoretical perspectives.
CO2
Analysis inaccurately applies other theorists’ perspectives.
Results are both inaccurate and not grounded in reason. Support
from life or course material is missing.
Analysis somewhat accurately applies other theorists’
perspectives. Results are either inaccurate or not grounded in

5. reason. Details and specifics from life and course material are
attempted to be used as support, but their significance may have
to be inferred.
Analysis accurately applies other perspectives. Results from
both perspectives are accurate and grounded in reason. Details
and specifics from life and course material are used for support.
Analysis insightfully and accurately applies other perspectives.
Results from perspectives are astute, accurate, and firmly
grounded in reason. Details and specifics from life and course
material are synthesized and proved as support and proof.
Evaluates how well these theories explain the person.
CO 2
Evaluation of accuracy of Freud’s perspective and the other two
theories is unclear or inaccurate throughout. Support from the
theorist’s life or course material is limited or missing.
Evaluation of accuracy of Freud’s perspective and the other two
theories is somewhat clear or is inaccurate in spots. Specific
details/examples from the studied theorist’s life or course
material are attempted to be used as support, but their
significance may have to be inferred.
Evaluation of accuracy of Freud’s perspective and the other two
theories is clear, accurate, and uses specific details/examples
from the studied theorist’s life and course material to strengthen
evaluation.
Evaluation of accuracy of Freud’s perspective and other two
theories is insightful, clear, concise, and accurate. It synthesizes
details/examples from the studied theorist’s life and course
material to inarguably support the evaluation.
Organization
Introduction
Thesis
Transitions

6. Conclusion
Introduction is limited or missing entirely.
The paper lacks a thesis statement.
Transitions are infrequent, illogical, or missing entirely.
Conclusion is limited or missing entirely.
Introduction is present but incomplete or underdeveloped.
The paper is loosely organized around a thesis that may have to
be inferred.
Transitions are sporadic.
Conclusion is present, but incomplete or underdeveloped.
Introduction has a clear opening, provides background
information, and states the topic.
The paper is organized around an arguable, clearly stated thesis
statement.
Transitions are appropriate and help the flow of ideas.
Conclusion summarizes main argument and has a clear ending.
Introduction catches the reader’s attention, provides compelling
and appropriate background info, and clearly states the topic.
The paper is well organized around an arguable, focused thesis.
Thoughtful transitions clearly show how ideas relate.

7. Conclusion leaves the reader with a sense of closure and
provides concluding insights.
Usage and Mechanics
Grammar
Spelling
Sentence structure
Writing contains numerous errors in spelling, grammar, and/or
sentence structure that severely interferes with readability and
comprehension.
Errors in spelling and grammar exist that somewhat interfere
with readability and/or comprehension.
Writing follows conventions of spelling and grammar
throughout. Errors are infrequent and do not interfere with
readability or comprehension.
The paper is basically error free in terms of mechanics.
Grammar and mechanics help establish a clear idea and aid the
reader in following the writer’s logic.
APA Elements
Attribution
Paraphrasing
Quotations
No attempt at APA format.
APA format is attempted to paraphrase, quote, and cite, but
errors are significant.
Using APA format, accurately paraphrased, quoted, and cited in
many spots throughout when appropriate or called for. Errors
present are somewhat minor.
Using APA format, accurately paraphrased, quoted, and cited
throughout the presentation when appropriate or called for.
Only a few minor errors present.
Style

8. Audience
Word Choice
Writing often slips into first and/or second person.
Word choice is consistently inaccurate, unclear, or
inappropriate for the audience.
Writing sometimes slips into first and/or second person.
Word choice is sometimes inaccurate, unclear, or inappropriate
for the audience.
Writing remains in third person throughout.
Word choice is accurate, clear, and appropriate for the
audience.
Writing remains professional in third person throughout.
Word choice is precise, appropriate for the audience, and
memorable.